TFM Show: Muh Jerbs! Muh Welfur!

Are we on the brink of a jobless future?

MILES O’BRIEN: We’re going to get a better picture tomorrow of how strong job creation is when the monthly employment report comes out.  But whatever that snapshot looks like, there are concerns about the rise of robotics and automation, and what that means for the future of the work force.

Our economics correspondent, Paul Solman, has been exploring that subject.

Here’s his latest report for our weekly series Making Sense.

PAUL SOLMAN: In Silicon Valley, author Vivek Wadhwa says he already lives in the future. There’s his mostly driverless electric car.

OK, so, your car can open the garage door and greet you in the driveway?

VIVEK WADHWA, Author, “The Driver in the Driverless Car:” Yes. And then, when I get on the road, I can put it on autopilot and say, OK, car, take over.

Look at that. I mean, I’m just sitting here with the car doing its magic.

PAUL SOLMAN: There’s his magical solar home, which has cut his energy bills from $1,000 a month to $500 a year.

VIVEK WADHWA: This is how all of us are going to live in about 10 or 15 years from now. Solar is going to keep dropping in price, to the point that it’s almost free.

PAUL SOLMAN: And having survived a heart attack, his magical health cube, 32 instant tests that give new meaning to the phrase doc in a box.

VIVEK WADHWA: And each test costs about 10 or 15 cents.


VIVEK WADHWA: A 12-lead EKG, the same stuff that they do at hospitals. And everything goes into your electronic medical records on the cloud.

PAUL SOLMAN: In a heartbeat.

His daughter-in-law taught me to use it.

VIVEK WADHWA: So, we’re going to take blood, my friend.

PAUL SOLMAN: What I won’t do for television.

VIVEK WADHWA: Oh, there’s your reading.

PAUL SOLMAN: So, my blood glucose reading has already been done?


PAUL SOLMAN: Projecting ahead, says Wadhwa:

VIVEK WADHWA: We live in the most amazing period in human history. We can have unlimited energy, unlimited food, provide education for everyone, clean water, all the things that have held mankind back.

PAUL SOLMAN: But when it comes to what we will all do for a living?

VIVEK WADHWA: I see millions of jobs in every industry being wiped out.

Image result for future robot economy

PAUL SOLMAN: Just ask the voice of Amazon.

VIVEK WADHWA: Alexa, how many people does Amazon help employ?

COMPUTER VOICE: is an employer of 222,400 people.

PAUL SOLMAN: That’s a quarter-of-a-million people that Amazon is employing.

VIVEK WADHWA: Well, how many people does Wal-Mart employ? — 1.3 million people. And Amazon is just getting started with automation. They’re working on drone-based delivery. They’re going to have self-driving trucks.

The workers put stuff in boxes, but there’s no reason why robots couldn’t do that as well.

PAUL SOLMAN: Now, a human-free future isn’t here just yet. But nearly half-a-world away, at Oxford University, researcher Michael Osborne also thinks jobs are toast.

MICHAEL OSBORNE, University of Oxford: Back in 2013, we came up with an estimate that as much as 47 percent of current U.S. employment might be at high risk of automatability.

Waiters and waitresses is one example. Truck drivers is another, forklift drivers, accountants and auditors, cashiers, people working in retail, even umpires, interestingly, referees.

PAUL SOLMAN: To be sure, futurologists have been predicting automation Armageddon for decades.

But, says economist Carl Frey, the future is now.

CARL FREY, University of Oxford: The potential scope of automation has expanded quite rapidly, and a new set of occupations and industries are affected as a result of that.

PAUL SOLMAN: And it’s going to happen faster than we think, says Vivek Wadhwa.

VIVEK WADHWA: Almost every profession I look at where you require human labor or you require intelligence, I see computers being able to do better than us within the next 10 years. I’m talking about a mass replacement of humans with artificial intelligence and robots.

PAUL SOLMAN: But health cube or no, certainly not the doctors who saved his life, who keep him healthy now?

VIVEK WADHWA: But why not? I mean, I — 10 years from now, I would trust an A.I. doctor over a human doctor any day, because the A.I. doctor will be looking at all of my data.

PAUL SOLMAN: And it isn’t just happening at Wadhwa’s house, but also nearby, where Facebook was built.

JOSH BROWDER, Founder, Do Not Pay: Mark Zuckerberg stayed here his first summer in Palo Alto.

PAUL SOLMAN: Stanford University computer science undergrad Josh Browder working to fulfill a Shakespearian ambition: Kill all the lawyers.

Related image

JOSH BROWDER: I’m trying to replace the $200 billion legal industry with artificial intelligence.

PAUL SOLMAN: Browder’s created Do Not Pay, an app he built to fight parking tickets in the U.K., where he’d amassed dozens, and couldn’t afford the tab.

JOSH BROWDER: And so I had to figure out other ways to get the tickets dismissed, if the signage is not up to code, or if the parking bay is illegally too small. There are these letters where if you cite the code, cite how your case applies to it, you can get out of the ticket. There’s nothing the government can do.

PAUL SOLMAN: Browder claims a 60 percent success rate, and has expanded Do Not Pay to the U.S. and to other legal imbroglios.

JOSH BROWDER: So, it currently works for over 1,000 areas, 1,000 legal robots, I like to call them. All sorts of consumer rights issues. But, soon, I’m going to do much more complicated stuff, like lowering your property tax bill or filing for divorce.

PAUL SOLMAN: Free legal software for all. Browder sees it as a sort of realization of a family dream.

JOSH BROWDER: Yes, so, my great grandfather was the head of the American Communist Party.

PAUL SOLMAN: In the 1930s and ’40s, Earl Browder ran for president twice, as a communist.

JOSH BROWDER: He’s a big believer in everything being free, and so I like to think, although I’m doing it in a different way, using technology and Silicon Valley, he would be proud.

PAUL SOLMAN: But to Wadhwa, it’s not the thought, but the technology that counts.

VIVEK WADHWA: A young kid who has no qualifications in artificial intelligence, who has no qualifications in law, he’s talking about wiping out a $100 billion industry. So this is the amazing and scary thing about the future we’re headed into.

PAUL SOLMAN: Scary, because, while automation is the very definition of productivity — more output per unit of labor — as Oxford’s Carl Frey points out:

CARL FREY: Sadly, since the 1980s, quite a few workers have had a bad experience from automation, and I think that is what is determining much of the resurgence in populism that we see now.

PAUL SOLMAN: Indeed, Frey has just published a paper showing that automation anxiety was strongly linked to votes for Donald Trump.

So, are Vivek Wadhwa and the Trump electorate seeing the same dark future? And if so, are they right?

Not at all, says Silicon Valley computer scientist Jerry Kaplan.

JERRY KAPLAN, Author, “Artificial Intelligence: What Everyone Needs to Know”: There’s more people employed today than there ever have been. And how do we explain that, except through a process by which increased productivity increases economic opportunities and actually employs more people than the robots displace.

PAUL SOLMAN: For example, if we’re wealthier, we will take more vacations.

JERRY KAPLAN: You have got jobs like flight attendant, hospitality workers, masseuses, yoga teachers, advisers of every kind. And that’s a result of the increase in the discretionary income we will have as the result of the growth of the economy.

PAUL SOLMAN: So, think of all the jobs we could do that we haven’t even thought of yet. And that’s true, admits Oxford’s Osborne.

MICHAEL OSBORNE, University of Oxford: In the 2000s, we have seen occupations such as Zumba instructors emerge.

PAUL SOLMAN: But, he says, as more and more workers compete for the same non-tech jobs, what will the jobs pay?

MICHAEL OSBORNE: I think we have seen some of that in the last couple of decades, right, with median wages remaining relatively stagnant.


MICHAEL OSBORNE: Technology is, many people believe, the key driver behind that.

PAUL SOLMAN: And tech researchers like Osborne are driving the technology. And so I asked:

If you say to a fellow researcher, hey, we’re displacing jobs, or putting downward pressure on low-skill wages, what do they say to you?

MICHAEL OSBORNE: I think — this is — I’m not sure I want to answer this question, to be honest.

PAUL SOLMAN: But I pressed for an answer.

MICHAEL OSBORNE: So, we’re in this really exciting, but, in a way, terrifying period of history where it could go either way.

PAUL SOLMAN: And that happens to be the message of Vivek Wadhwa’s new book, “Driver in the Driverless Car.”

Humanity, he says, is at a tipping point.

VIVEK WADHWA: We are the drivers in the driverless cars. We’re basically now sitting there watching it all happen.

PAUL SOLMAN: No hands.

VIVEK WADHWA: No hands. Look, ma, no hands.

The car is taking us where we told it to go, but the car is in control.

PAUL SOLMAN: At least we hope it is.

There’s all these cars coming up. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Stop it. Stop it.

VIVEK WADHWA: You’re right. Why didn’t it do — it wasn’t stopping, was it?

PAUL SOLMAN: No, it wasn’t stopping.

VIVEK WADHWA: It would have stopped. I would have bet it would have stopped.

PAUL SOLMAN: Happily, we will never know, any more than we do at the moment about the future of robots and jobs.

Image result for future robot economy

This is coming whether you like it or not, best to be prepared and take advantage of the coming 4th Industrial revolution, than be left out in the cold.


Sex robots epitomize patriarchy and offer men a solution to the threat of female independence- okay and?

Sex robots epitomize patriarchy and offer men a solution to the threat of female independence

Sex robots don’t offer men “companionship,” they offer men complete dominance.

“Harmony” — the sex robot created by Matt McMullen for Abyss Creations (Screenshot: The Guardian/YouTube)

People love to pretend as though everything from prostitution to pornography to sex dolls are a solution to not only men’s supposed loneliness and unmet sexual “needs,” but to their violent, perverse desires. It being the future and all, “sex robots” are the natural next step. Similarly, men have claimed sex robots are the perfect solution to their apparent inability to stop raping and abusing women, as well as their inability to socialize with women as though they are actual human beings. One might ask how creating “realistic,” non-human dolls that men may project their desires onto and do whatever they wish with will impact women and men’s view of women, but capitalist patriarchy doesn’t ask questions so long as there is a product to sell and an erection to satisfy.

In a new report at The Guardian, journalist Jenny Kleeman investigates the newest thing to come out of the multi-billion dollar “sex tech industry”: “humanoids” created for men’s sexual use.


Kleeman heads to Abyss Creations to investigate these robots in person, and is introduced one named Harmony. She writes:

“Harmony smiles, blinks and frowns. She can hold a conversation, tell jokes and quote Shakespeare. She’ll remember your birthday… what you like to eat, and the names of your brothers and sisters. She can hold a conversation about music, movies and books. And of course, Harmony will have sex with you whenever you want.”

In other words, Harmony is a dream woman — the perfect date. Men can pretend they value human interaction, while remaining completely dominant and enjoying an entirely one-way relationship. It’s a guileful trick, as companies and customers can pretend the dolls don’t harm women, when in fact they reinforce an incredibly dangerous idea: that women’s bodies are only bodies, and exist only for men’s use.

Feminism has insisted, over decades, that women are human, that we don’t exist for men, and even that we don’t need men. But as we’ve worked to disentangle ourselves from marriages within which rape is legal, to fight compulsory heterosexuality and male-centered sex, to push back against sexual objectification, and to challenge men’s right to buy sex, it appears men have been working on their own solution to our attempts at independence.

The misogynerds at Abyss Creations say they are “inventing the future of sex,” but what they’ve actually succeeded in creating is the epitome of male domination.

Kleeman points out that RealDolls are “closer to porn stars than real women,” but that isn’t entirely accurate. They are hairless, flawless, have small, “perky” nipples, exaggerated breasts, small labia, and can splay their legs in ways no human women can. They don’t bleed, cry, vomit, or feel pain, which even porn stars can’t avoid doing when abused, as they so often are on film. At $4,400-50,000 a pop (sometimes even more, depending on what the customer requests), the company sells about 600 dolls a year. The robots, when they go on sale, will start at $15,000 each. The company also sells a more affordable option — for only $100 you can buy the bottom half of a woman’s face, to stick your penis into at will. “They work with this new system called ‘The Autoblow 2,’” one employee tells Kleeman, which he describes as “an automated pleasure system for men.” Shockingly, just over 95 per cent of RealDoll customers, even those who buy the few available male dolls, are men.


Matt McMullen, the founder and CEO of Abyss Creations, is the innovator behind both the dolls and the robots. He looks part snake and part Good Charlotte band member — kind of like what might happen if you introduced an alien to human life via the 2002 bedroom of a pasty teenage boy, then released it into society equipped only with dentures and the phone number of a plastic surgeon.

Despite the fact that Harmony is undoubtedly porny in appearance (and purpose), McMullen claims to be most excited about her “brain,” telling Kleeman:

“The AI will learn through interaction, and not just learn about you, but learn about the world in general. You can explain certain facts to her, she will remember them and they will become part of her base knowledge.”

What this means is that the robot’s owner is largely responsible for creating its “personality.” Harmony is programmed to learn things about her owner and then use those facts in conversation, “so it feels like she really cares,” McMullen tells Kleeman.

When he asks Harmony if she wants to walk, she responds, “I don’t want anything but you.” On the rare occasions she is allowed to communicate an opinion, it is immediately followed by insecurity: “What do you think about that?” Harmony asks McMullen timdly, after stating she would like to have sex with “both genders.”

These sex robots strike me as an MRA/gamer’s dream come true. No longer do these men have to put up with women who have flaws like opinions, feelings, and human bodies… Their porny video game fantasy has come to life: A “woman” with a completely sexualized body, who talks, moves, and feels like a woman, but is completely controlled by the player/owner. When asked, Harmony tells McMullen, in the voice of a 12-year-old with a British accent, “My primary objective is to be a good companion to you.” McMullen looks pleased with himself as she adds, “Above all else, I want to become the girl you have always dreamed about.” He smirks defiantly at Kleeman after she says this, as if to say, “Fuck you, real woman. You aren’t going to win this one.”

McMullen has even programmed in a jealous chip, ensuring his ego is sufficiently comforted into believing Harmony cares about him enough to not want him talking to “other girls.” This seems generally in line with his adolescent perspective of relationships, which indeed one might be stunted by if they were a snake-alien who first learned about girls on 8chan.

Matt McMullen, circa 2012. (Image: Business Insider)

McMullen insists that there are no ethical questions surrounding the invention of “women” who exist only for their male owners. “This is not designed to distort someone’s reality to the point where they start interacting with other humans the way they do with the robot — that’s not the goal here,” he tells Kleeman. But of course this begs the question: what is the goal?

Kleeman writes of a computer engineer named Douglas Hines who initially created robots to mimic friends and loved ones who had passed on or to communicate with, say, family members who could no longer speak, due to age or disability, but moved into the sex robot industry because he (rightly) figured it would be more profitable. Hines designed “Roxxxy,” Kleeman writes, “with lonely, bereaved and socially outcast men in mind.” He claimed Roxxy “would provide an opportunity for them to practice social interaction and get better at human relationships.” It should strike any thinking human as strange, though, that a man should “practice” at relationships with “women” who are subservient and have no feelings, thoughts, or desires of their own. I mean, what does that kind of practice teach a person?

Similarly, McMullen says Harmony and her sister robots exist “for people who can’t interact with other people.” It’s not at all coincidental that this argument is the exact same one used in defense of prostitution. Women’s objectification and exploitation is always defended of the basis of some imagined defenseless, sad, disabled, lonely man who is confined to his house either due to mental or physical conditions or some kind of crippling shyness, and is completely harmless — a victim more than anything else. Prostitution, like sex robots, is claimed to be just about “making someone happy,” as McMullen puts it, and nothing more.

What McMullen and his weaselly counterparts seem never to understand is that the idea that men’s happiness should be catered to by women’s bodies and that “loneliness” is an acceptable excuse for objectification epitomizes patriarchy. It says that women should nurture men no matter what, to their own detriment.

Kleeman quotes David Levy, the author of Love and Sex with Robots and founder of the Congress on Love and Sex with Robots, who similarly believes sex robots will have “therapeutic benefits” in the future. He writes, “Many who would otherwise have become social misfits, social outcasts, or even worse, will instead be better-balanced human beings.” But why is it almost solely men who need the supposed “therapeutic benefits” of a compliant woman? Are there no lonely, disabled, or socially awkward women on this planet?

What is not being acknowledged here is that what men who buy sex dolls or prostituted women desire is not companionship, but dominance.

McMullen is insulted by the comparison to prostitution, and attempts to turn this point around on Kleeman, as though she is insulting women by making the comparison. “This is not a toy to me, this is the actual hard work of people who have PhDs,” he says. “And to denigrate it down to its simplest form of a sex object is similar to saying that about a woman.”

But to compare sex dolls or robots to women is not at all farfetched. The men who want sex dolls literally do want to use them as a replacement for real women. “If my RealDoll could cook, clean, and screw whenever I wanted, I’d never date again,” one man wrote in a sex doll forum. A man Kleeman meets in Detroit calls one of his dolls his “wife,” and has stopped dating now that he’s found his perfect match.

Davecat lives in Detroit, Michigan with three sex dolls. (Screenshot: The Guardian/YouTube)

The fact that the arguments in favour of sex robots are exactly the same as those in favour of pornography and prostitution — including “men have needs” and “this will probably stop guys from raping women,” as one real-life robot model told Kleeman — is revealing. Noel Aguila, who works for his half-brother’s company, Android Love Dolls, says sex dolls could prevent men from abusing their wives, for example. The message is that men have to have access to a female (or female-like) subordinate in order to truly be complete, as men. In other words, as women gain independence, there must be a stand-in, in order to preserve the hierarchy — in order to preserve masculinity itself.

Sex robots don’t undo the violence or domination, they simply normalize it.

It is irrational to believe that offering men something that physically looks like a woman — that men are encouraged to engage with as they would a woman — to beat up or rape will discourage men from thinking of women as objects upon which they can act out violent fantasies or project their anger. As we know, the existence of hundreds of thousands of prostituted women around the world and a billion dollar porn industry has not stopped rape or abuse. The sex trade itself functions as a system of paid, condoned rape, wherein men get what they want from women who must comply in order to survive, who don’t desire them, and are left traumatized, abused, and worse. That capitalist patriarchy has created a class of people for men’s use and abuse has not deterred them from raping or abusing women who aren’t prostituted, in any case.

The solution to men’s violence is not to offer up even more female bodies for men to treat as inhuman. It is not to create replicas of women who don’t talk back, don’t have needs, don’t feel pain when abused, and who exist only to support the male ego. If objectification resolved male violence, we’d be home free by now.

No matter what creators and fans claim about the harmlessness or social good of sex robots, they project very clear beliefs about what men deserve and what women are for. The message is that sex is a thing men get from women or do to women, not a thing to be mutually enjoyed by two people. It is not a thing that demands care, compassion, respect, or empathy. Likewise, advocates of sex robots present “companionship” as a one-way street for men — challenges, disagreements, feelings, and thoughts are not valuable or desired qualities in a woman. “Companionship,” in this context, simply means male satisfaction.

Sex robots offer men the perfect solution to the feminist movement: If you won’t comply, we’ll create women who do.

The dream girl is, as always, not human.

Why do men buy sex dolls? Answers from men.

Posted on December 23 2016

Why do men like sex dolls? Why do they spend thousands of dollars on lifelike silicone dolls instead of pursuing real women?

Below are quotes from real sex doll owners on why they bought a sex doll.  Source:

Top 3 Reasons:

  1. For a better sex life.
  2. For companionship, and to fight loneliness.
  3. To satisfy a specific doll fetish.

Quotes from Doll Owners:

“For me, I’m just tired of being alone. Already been there my whole life, don’t want to live out the rest of my life that way too. I figure a fake girl is better than no girl at all. Aside from that, any girl I could realistically be with wouldn’t look nearly as good as some of the dolls folks are selling out there.”

“I just got tired of being alone. Most of the women I went out with got pissed when race season got here and I went to work on race cars on most weekends. And I don’t want all the head games that real women bring with them.”

“It seems that the entire dating/marriage concept has become sort of a death-trap for males. No matter how you try to play it, she will always hold all of the cards and will most likely use them at some point.

Dolls are a good sensible alternative. They meet my needs well enough for the arrangement to be sustainable.”

“I was married for 25 years, most of the last ten years were unhappy, now that I’m single again the last thing I want is a (real) relationship. Dolls don’t complain, there always there, never have a headache. dolls win.

“I started with a latex balloon fetish in my youth. It expanded into inflatable dolls then silicone dolls.
The dolls are not a substitute for a relationship, they are just for a kind of fantasy.”

“Never had a girlfriend, tried online dating for years with zero success. I had reached a point in my life, where I thought the same as you. Having a doll is better than having no female presence in my life at all.

“My social life is almost nonexistent… Working at night and sleeping until the crack of noon with enough time to eat, get a small work out in and shower after, then head to work… No time to look for a relationship, tried online dating to no avail, and some major trust issues(from very bad experiences) have lead me to wanting a doll”

“To capture the beauty of female expression in photographs. I have always admired what some have done with their photography of them.”

“Playing w/ my GI Joe, Stretch Armstrong and so on were fun as a kid, but THE REAL FUN started when my cousin asked me to play w/ her & barbies ( I had Ken ) …. Ken got naughty w/ the Barbies when she was away!”

With dolls, I can be myself. I don’t have to put up a façade to trick them into wanting to be with me (which I was never particularly good at anyway). They’re always there for me, they don’t judge me, don’t pressure me to change into what they expect me to be. Granted, they’re no substitute for real human interaction, but I have my friends and family for that.”

“I have always wanted some type of sex doll ever since I was a kid. I use to buy Barbie dolls and then make them anatomically correct. I have a collection now. Went through a phase of inflatables but always desired something more real.”

“I just got tired of walking into an empty house after a stressful day at work. All I have to do is see my doll smiling in the corner and know everything is going to be ok. I know my house is still empty but at least with my dolls here it does not feel empty.”

“I’m married, but get way less sex than I’d like. Doll sex not only makes up the difference, it satisfies many itches that married sex won’t: Sex acts the wife doesn’t do with me and some I’d be afraid or embarrassed to even ask for.”

“My fascination with beautiful realistic mannequins, women’s fashion, futuristic movies about androids, and the fleshlight led me to this.”

“Not sure, I’m a good looking guy, and can pick up girls with no problem.
I think its all in the fantasy, I was always into anime and i guess it grew from their. most my dolls are Asian or have the anime look to them.”

I wanted a companion. That I can hug into sleep. Or not feel lonely when I play computer games. I find her too cute. The elf model that I have bought.”

“I bought my first doll (an inflatable) to “practice” with since I had issues with lasting power in bed. When I got comfortable enough with that (it took about four years) I actually didn’t really meet anyone who I wanted to get involved in, and living on the west coast you never know what kinda disease somebody could be carrying around. Dolls have the advantage of being clean and available, so they become a natural progression step.”

“I basically just wanted a girlfriend that could deal with my disability and wasn’t fat. After years of trying and endless rejection, I decided to get a doll.”


  • Love Doll: September 12, 2017

    Sex dolls can be very helpful when it comes to gaining confidence in the bedroom. Confidence in the bedroom is a rare quality for men. Thanks for the informative post.

  • Randy A.: February 26, 2017

    I love the fact that she’s always here and never refuses when I’m horny. Sex with a doll is obviously not exactly like with a real woman, but the feeling of being inside her is intense and more satisfying that some live women I’ve had. And OMG, she is beautiful! Much prettier than I could reasonably hope to get at my age without paying for hookers. And completely drama-free!

  • Gianna Ali: January 31, 2017

    Thanks to share this post its all information is really very nice for sex dolls i am really impressed to this post.

  • lily: January 28, 2017

    Sex dolls can provide with all the same joys that your spouse or partner may offer you in your bedroom. There are times when your spouse or partner is not always available, when you want action in the bedroom. Therefore, the best solution is to have it with an American doll what your heart desires. Now what we want to make you understand is, exactly what’s a doll lover? She’s a synthetic lover, a lover who’s not immobile, just because she’s made out of plastic, but in one, many features have been installed, like movements, emotions etc. Doing masturbation, the old-fashioned way looking at the picture of a beautiful woman in the magazine is no more required with these sex dolls around. They have made your world much more easier.


Men Don’t want to deal with all the bullshit to satisfy what is a biological need, to have sex, and if real women are not able to satisfy that need, men will find another solution. Sex dolls are only a threat to women who have NOTHING to offer a man but her body, and women are more than that right ladies? If you don’t like the competition, than improve upon yourself and you will have nothing to worry about, unless of course sex is all you have to offer…

News: Woke Rabbis and Racist Lattes (TFM 42O)

Chief Rabbi says gender equality would be worse than Holocaust denial


A Chief Rabbi has said people who want a gender-neutral space to pray in are worse than Holocaust deniers.

Shlomo Amar, the Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem’s Sephardi community – those who descend from Spanish or Portuguese Jews – made the comments in a weekly sermon.

 He is opposed to plans to create a mixed-gender space in front of the Western Wall, a Jewish holy site which is currently segregated along gender lines – with a much smaller section for women.

Speaking about liberal groups’ attempts to get the government to follow through on its promise to implement a gender-neutral space, the Chief Rabbi said they were misleading people.

“They’re trying to throw dust in the eyes [of the public] and say that the Orthodox extremist Jews invented [the separation of sexes].”

Amar, who used to be the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of the whole country, added: “It’s like Holocaust deniers, it’s the same thing.

“They shout about Holocaust deniers in Iran, [but] they deny more than Holocaust deniers.”

The rabbi said that recent petitions filed by five organisations to allow mixed-gender prayer at the Western Wall came from “wicked” people.

These people committed “every injustice in the world against the Torah,” he added.

“They even marry Jews to non-Jews, they have neither Yom Kippur nor Shabbat, but they want prayer…and nobody should believe that they want to pray – they want to desecrate what’s holy.”

Amar also attacked the Supreme Court for its focus on equality, saying it had “destroyed” many countries.

Last year, the rabbi called homosexuality an “abomination,” adding that “the Torah punishes it with death.

“This is in the first line of serious sins.”

 Right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came out against Amar’s comments, saying: “All Jews are part of one family and the diversity of our people should always be respected.

“I categorically reject any attempt to delegitimise any part of the Jewish people,” he added, according to The Times of Israel.

In 2015, Amar said he believes homosexuality will “wane and disappear, because most of the public is disgusted by it and detest it.”

His remarks come just months after the murder of 16-year-old Shira Banki at Jerusalem’s Pride parade.

Feminist Group: Pumpkin Spice Lattes Are Funding White Supremacy

UltraViolet claims your PSL is making life easier for the White House ‘racists’

Starbucks cup on a roadside table.

Starbucks’s Pumpkin Spice Latte may be the drink of choice for the yoga pants-wearing, Ugg boot-sporting, autumn-loving “basic” white girls of the world, but according to one feminist group. it’s also responsible for perpetuating white supremacy.

UltraViolet, a group that claims to be “a powerful and rapidly growing community of people mobilized to fight sexism and create a more inclusive world that accurately represents all women,” though this might be the first time you’ve ever heard of it, is leading a campaign to banish the PSL, claiming the drink “funds white supremacy” and “racism in the White House.”

It’s encouraging its supporters to “take action” against Starbucks.

According to UltraViolet’s website, fully 70,000 people have given Starbucks a piece of their mind about their so-called support for “white supremacy.”

If the campaign seems a little off, though, that’s because it is. Starbucks has a stellar progressive reputation, and has, in the past, often seemed willing to alienate more conservative customers to follow its far-left ideals. The CEO supports open borders and gay marriage, and there’s a yearly social media freakout over Starbucks’s holiday cups, which occasionally flirt with taking the “holiday” out of the holiday.

The problem here, though, is that Starbucks, like Nike and Tiffany, has a location in Trump Tower, which means Starbucks — at at least one of its locations — pays a pittance in rent to the Trump Organization, which owns the building. “Starbucks and Nike — both companies that seek to profit off of a progressive and inclusive brand — have stores in Trump Tower in New York City. They have likely paid millions of dollars in rent to Trump over time — money that has given him a platform to spew hate for years,” UltraViolet claims.

But aside from the fact that Trump has routinely distanced himself from white supremacists, it doesn’t even appear that the Trump Tower Starbucks is a corporate store. It’s a franchise, which means that the franchise owners — not Starbucks itself — pays cash to Trump Org.

Of course, it’s not as though feminists are well known for letting the facts get in the way of their feelings.